Seasonal shift in timing of vernalization as an adaptation to extreme winter

  1. Susan Duncan
  2. Svante Holm
  3. Julia Questa
  4. Judith Irwin
  5. Alastair Grant
  6. Caroline Dean  Is a corresponding author
  1. John Innes Centre, United Kingdom
  2. Mid-Sweden University, Sweden
  3. University of East Anglia, United Kingdom

Abstract

The requirement for vernalization, a need for prolonged cold to trigger flowering, aligns reproductive development with favorable spring conditions. In Arabidopsis thaliana vernalization depends on the cold-induced epigenetic silencing of the floral repressor locus FLC. Extensive natural variation in vernalization response is associated with A. thaliana accessions collected from different geographical regions. Here, we analyse natural variation for vernalization temperature requirement in accessions, including those from the northern limit of the A. thaliana range. Vernalization required temperatures above 0oC and was still relatively effective at 14oC in all the accessions. The different accessions had characteristic vernalization temperature profiles. One Northern Swedish accession showed maximum vernalization at 8oC, both at the level of flowering time and FLC chromatin silencing. Historical temperature records predicted all accessions would vernalize in autumn in N. Sweden, a prediction we validated in field transplantation experiments. The vernalization response of the different accessions was monitored over three intervals in the field and found to match that when the average field temperature was given as a constant condition. The vernalization temperature range of 0-14oC meant all accessions fully vernalized before snowfall in N. Sweden. These findings have important implications for understanding the molecular basis of adaptation and for predicting the consequences of climate change on flowering time.

Article and author information

Author details

  1. Susan Duncan

    John Innes Centre, Norwich, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  2. Svante Holm

    Mid-Sweden University, Sundsvall, Sweden
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  3. Julia Questa

    John Innes Centre, Norwich, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  4. Judith Irwin

    John Innes Centre, Norwich, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  5. Alastair Grant

    Department of Environmental Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, United Kingdom
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.
  6. Caroline Dean

    John Innes Centre, Norwich, United Kingdom
    For correspondence
    caroline.dean@jic.ac.uk
    Competing interests
    The authors declare that no competing interests exist.

Reviewing Editor

  1. Detlef Weigel, Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology, Germany

Version history

  1. Received: January 21, 2015
  2. Accepted: July 17, 2015
  3. Accepted Manuscript published: July 23, 2015 (version 1)
  4. Version of Record published: August 12, 2015 (version 2)

Copyright

© 2015, Duncan et al.

This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License permitting unrestricted use and redistribution provided that the original author and source are credited.

Metrics

  • 2,782
    views
  • 755
    downloads
  • 68
    citations

Views, downloads and citations are aggregated across all versions of this paper published by eLife.

Download links

A two-part list of links to download the article, or parts of the article, in various formats.

Downloads (link to download the article as PDF)

Open citations (links to open the citations from this article in various online reference manager services)

Cite this article (links to download the citations from this article in formats compatible with various reference manager tools)

  1. Susan Duncan
  2. Svante Holm
  3. Julia Questa
  4. Judith Irwin
  5. Alastair Grant
  6. Caroline Dean
(2015)
Seasonal shift in timing of vernalization as an adaptation to extreme winter
eLife 4:e06620.
https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.06620

Share this article

https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.06620

Further reading

    1. Ecology
    2. Evolutionary Biology
    Théo Constant, F Stephen Dobson ... Sylvain Giroud
    Research Article

    Seasonal animal dormancy is widely interpreted as a physiological response for surviving energetic challenges during the harshest times of the year (the physiological constraint hypothesis). However, there are other mutually non-exclusive hypotheses to explain the timing of animal dormancy, that is, entry into and emergence from hibernation (i.e. dormancy phenology). Survival advantages of dormancy that have been proposed are reduced risks of predation and competition (the ‘life-history’ hypothesis), but comparative tests across animal species are few. Using the phylogenetic comparative method applied to more than 20 hibernating mammalian species, we found support for both hypotheses as explanations for the phenology of dormancy. In accordance with the life-history hypotheses, sex differences in hibernation emergence and immergence were favored by the sex difference in reproductive effort. In addition, physiological constraint may influence the trade-off between survival and reproduction such that low temperatures and precipitation, as well as smaller body mass, influence sex differences in phenology. We also compiled initial evidence that ectotherm dormancy may be (1) less temperature dependent than previously thought and (2) associated with trade-offs consistent with the life-history hypothesis. Thus, dormancy during non-life-threatening periods that are unfavorable for reproduction may be more widespread than previously thought.

    1. Ecology
    Ari Grele, Tara J Massad ... Lora A Richards
    Research Article

    Declines in biodiversity generated by anthropogenic stressors at both species and population levels can alter emergent processes instrumental to ecosystem function and resilience. As such, understanding the role of biodiversity in ecosystem function and its response to climate perturbation is increasingly important, especially in tropical systems where responses to changes in biodiversity are less predictable and more challenging to assess experimentally. Using large-scale transplant experiments conducted at five neotropical sites, we documented the impacts of changes in intraspecific and interspecific plant richness in the genus Piper on insect herbivory, insect richness, and ecosystem resilience to perturbations in water availability. We found that reductions of both intraspecific and interspecific Piper diversity had measurable and site-specific effects on herbivory, herbivorous insect richness, and plant mortality. The responses of these ecosystem-relevant processes to reduced intraspecific Piper richness were often similar in magnitude to the effects of reduced interspecific richness. Increased water availability reduced herbivory by 4.2% overall, and the response of herbivorous insect richness and herbivory to water availability were altered by both intra- and interspecific richness in a site-dependent manner. Our results underscore the role of intraspecific and interspecific richness as foundations of ecosystem function and the importance of community and location-specific contingencies in controlling function in complex tropical systems.